1. PREADOLESCENT LEADERS: CRITICAL REFLECTIONS FROM A WELL-BEING
PERSPECTIVE
Johan J Liebenberg
Private practice
*Vera Roos
School for Psycho-social Behavioural Sciences: Psychology
North-West University
Potchefstroom
Tel. no.: + 27 18 2991725
Fax no.: +27 18 299 1730
Cell no: 082 565 3419
E-mail address: vera.roos@nwu.ac.za/ johanlieb@mweb.co.za
ABSTRACT
Very little information is available on the impact of leadership practices in South African primary
schools on the development of preadolescent learners. Leadership in primary schools focuses
mainly on the roles, tasks, features, identification and development of “leadership”. Leadership
practices as they are currently applied in most of the primary schools in South Africa challenge
preadolescent development, with serious consequences. The purpose of this research is to reflect
critically on the appropriateness of existing leadership models for the preadolescent from a well-
being perspective, as described by Ryff and Keyes (1995). A qualitative research method, which
follows an inductive, exploratory approach, was selected because this method acknowledges the
complexity of the phenomenon. Data were collected by means of focus groups and written
assignments. The six components of psychological well-being, namely: self-acceptance, personal
growth, purpose in life, positive relations with others, environmental mastery and autonomy are
used in the discussion of the findings. The findings confirm that the current social phenomenon
of preadolescent leadership contributes to negative evaluations of the self and personal
experiences, early identify foreclosure, disrupted peer group interactions, distorted relationships

2. with adults and a limited environment for the development of self-determination.
Key words:
Preadolescent; development; leadership practices; psychological wellbeing; qualitative
investigation; leadership values

3. INTRODUCTION
Very little information is available on the development of learners’ councils in South African
primary schools. Moreover, this practice is also not reported in the developmental psychology
literature (Berger, 1994; Hook, Watts & Cockroft, 2002; Kail & Cavanaugh, 2000; Shaffer, 2000;
Yamaguchi, 2001).
The significance of leadership in primary schools with a white Afrikaner tradition should
be understood against the socio-political background where, prior to 1994, the Christian-National
philosophy of the country’s educational institutions was dictated by legislation (De Wilzem,
1988; Follet, 1985; Strydom, 1970; Tierney, 1996; Weber, 1985). The objective was to produce
leaders who would ultimately realise and preserve the adultist and ideological view of leadership,
which was regarded as a means to hold onto power within a specific political system (Bell &
Bromnick, 2003; Bowie, 2000; Tierney, 1996). Based on this view, leadership in primary schools
focused on the skills, roles, tasks, features, identification and development of “leadership”, not
children. The meaning attached to the leadership role was furthermore superficially amplified and
inflated by primary school level objectives and values such as achievement, competition and
social comparison (Yamaguchi, 2001), as well as monetary considerations.
In this context, the term leadership refers to the inducement and management of change,
taking critical decisions, and promoting and maintaining the school’s values and integrity
(Barker, 1997; Gibbons, 1992; Rost, 1991, 1993). Management refers to the maintenance of the
status quo and stability (Barker, 1997; Gibbons, 1992; Rost, 1991, 1993). Leadership skills and
duties among children in a school context refer to management skills which relate specifically to
the maintenance of stability in the institutional system. Child leaders seem to be a vital part of the
management function of any school and serve as substitutes for teacher supervision (De Beer,
1992; De Wilzem, 1988). For example learners are appointed and held responsible for
maintaining discipline among fellow learners, performing duties with regard to general order, and
acting as messengers for teachers, as substitutes for teachers when they are not present and as
traffic officers on school grounds (Buscall, 1994; De Beer, 1992; Follet, 1985; Smith, 1991).
Leaders very seldom (and in some instances never) have a say in the way things are done.
Opposed to the adultist and ideological viewpoint is the scarcely researched opinions of
the children who are involved on ground level. From this perspective the obvious objective of
leadership seems to be different, which will be illustrated in this research. When the special
development needs of the preadolescent are taken into consideration, the misalignment between

4. leadership and the developing preadolscent becomes evident.
The Carnegie Council (in Wavering, 1995) defines preadolescence as the age group
between 10 and 15 years of age. Other sources refer to the group of children between 10 and 14
years of age, or 11 and 14 years of age (Stafford, 1982; Wiles & Bondi, 2001). The exact age
group, however, is not that important. It is far more important to take into consideration the
remarkable emotional, social, intellectual and physical changes that occur and needs that arise
during this critical developmental phase (Berger, 1994; Hook et al., 2002; Kail & Cavanaugh,
2000; Newman & Newman, 1997).
Physical changes represent the most obvious development taking place, and are often
followed by other developmental dimensions (Walker, 1995). Preadolescence is characterised by
rapid physical growth and sexual awareness. Preadolescents are particularly vulnerable when it
comes to the emphasis on the importance of physical appearance, which affects in particular the
perceptions of the peer group and the teachers (Berger, 1994; Kaplan, 1998, Newman &
Newman, 1997). Preadolescents who develop faster than their peers are more inclined to be
selected as leaders in their class, sports teams and other group activities. Those who develop late,
or at an average rate, are not nearly as popular (Berger, 1994; Peterson, 1996). Sigelman (1999:
280) concludes that “the rate of maturation sometimes leads to events that determine the path of
the rest of one’s life”.
Current findings indicate that the development of the brain during the preadolescent and
adolescent period is just as important as that which occurs during the first two years of a child’s
development (Minden, 2004). Areas in the brain that control aspects such as: self-control;
planning and the development of strategy; organising; initiation of focus and attention; ending,
starting and shifting attention; emotions; ability to make a judgement; intelligence and identity
(i.e. the frontal and temporal lobe and the corpus callosum) continue to develop until the age of
18 to 25 years (American Bar Association, 2003; Gied et al., 1999).
Psychosocial development refers to the preadolescent child’s identity and self-awareness
with regard to the sexual, moral and psychic growth within a specific socio-cultural context. The
context refers to the experience and development of the self within the application of a primary
school’s leadership policy (Newman & Newman, 1997). The dominant psychosocial
development tasks of children aged 6 to12 are competence, which refers to the unlimited practise
of concrete reasoning skills, physical skills and intelligence in the completion of tasks and

5. reliability, which refers to the ability to be committed and loyal to individuals and groups with
reference to friendships, self-evaluation and the development of identity (Kaplan, 1998; Newman
& Newman, 1997).
The preadolscent continuously experiments spontaneously with social power and abilities
and calibrates his/her self against the group to explore his/her unique individuality. The
self/identity is defined by means of the group. Social comparison, especially in the school,
generates feelings of inferiority (Newman & Newman, 1997; Shaffer, 2000; Sigelman, 1999).
The characteristics of early developers correspond with the symptoms of identity foreclosure
(Peterson, 1996; Schwartz & Dunham, 2000; Sternberg, 2004).
Preadolescence represents the start of a period of extensive self-analysis and evaluation
which later culminates in the development of a comprehensive and integrated identity (Erikson,
1980). Marcia (in Kail & Cavanaugh, 2000; Sternberg 2004) identifies the concepts of
exploration and commitment from the work of Erikson. The process whereby the identity is
formed entails the exploration and testing of alternative ideas, beliefs and behaviour. From this
follows a process of committing the self to a specific set of goals, values and beliefs which were
selected during a process of conscious and purposeful decisions (Kail & Cavanaugh, 2000;
Sigelman, 1999; Sternberg, 2004). The characteristics of early developers correspond with the
symptoms of identity foreclosure (Peterson, 1996; Schwartz & Dunham, 2000; Sternberg, 2004).
An important interface between the school and the child refers to the effect on the moral
development of the child. The school is a micro community in which the broader community is
represented. In the school environment children learn how things work in real life and they gain
the opportunity to define themselves in relation to the world in which they live (Berman, 1997;
Wiles & Bondi, 2001). This implies that the preadolscent leader/non-leader has to be able to
evaluate his/her daily activities within the omnipresent leadership model within a wider context
and be aware that behaviour has certain social and political implications. This means that the
preadolscent has to have the ability to act in a way which is consistent with learned behaviour.
The essence of the appointment of primary school leaders is based on values such as
popularity, success, achievements, competition (Hendrikz, 1983; Follet, 1985) and a climate that
encourages the egocentric hunger for power and status (Berman, 1997; Du Plessis, 1994). These
are all aspects which have a normative influence in the live of Grade 7 learners. An event is
normative when it occurs in a similar way for most people in a given group, and what that

6. experience is being shared in a similar by the same group or cohort (Hook et al., 2002). The
leadership event in primary schools is normative because it is a planned institutional social
occurrence which no Grade 7 learner in hundreds of schools can avoid. Leadership roles are
attached to learners in a mutually exclusive way. Learners are either included for being a leader,
or are excluded.
The purpose of this research is to reflect critically on the appropriateness of existing
leadership models for the preadolescent from the perspective of the child’s well-being as
described by Ryff and Keyes (1995). The dimensions of environmental mastery, personal
growth, purpose in life, autonomy, self-acceptance and positive relations with others, will be
discussed. These dimensions were derived from the synthesis of theories of lifespan development
(e.g. Erikson, Buhler, Jung, Neugarten), clinical accounts of positive functioning (e.g. Allport,
Maslow, Rogers), and descriptions of positive mental health (e.g. Jahoda, Birren).
METHOD
A qualitative research method which follows an inductive, exploratory approach was selected
because this method acknowledges the complexity of the phenomenon of leadership (Creswell,
1998; Parry, 1998). This complexity comprises the multidimensional intra-psychological and
behavioural components of preadolescents and the interpersonal and organisational aspects of the
leadership phenomenon (Conger, 1998).
Research context
The primary school is situated in an affluent city environment. The school is in a transitional
process regarding leadership models, and the school’s governing body requested assistance in
assessing two leadership models, namely a traditional model and a new proposed leadership
model. The traditional model comprises the allocation of permanent leadership roles - the so-
called prefects - to a group (15 boys and 15 girls) of senior primary school learners for the
duration of a year. The learners are chosen by means of a democratic selection process, in which
the senior grade learners (grades 5 - 7) and teachers vote for candidates, who are identified by the
teachers and the principal of the school. The prefects function as a small select subgroup in the
school context, and their purpose is to serve the school.
The new leadership model comprises eight committees (buildings and grounds, culture,

7. events, sports, tidiness, scholar patrol, contingency and media) including all the children in Grade
7, on a rotating system. The committees represent the main task or fields where the school has
traditionally needed the help of learners to make school organisation easier. Every committee
chooses a boy and girl chairperson that serves on an executive committee. The executive
committee chooses from their members a boy and girl chairperson.
Data collection
Written information was obtained from learners in the traditional model through the following
question: Your Grade 7 year is nearly a thing of the past. During your Grade 7 year some
children were selected to be leaders and some were not. This has been a custom at the school for
many years. Write a letter to someone you feel confident about talking to and tell this person
about your experience of being selected as a leader, or not to be selected as a leader. Tell this
person everything you think and feel about this experience. Altogether 30 learners were selected
as leaders, and 29 protocols (96,5 %) were returned. Furthermore, 87 children were not selected
as leaders and 82 protocols (94.25%) were returned.
Data were also collected, during the next year, from learners who participated in the new
proposed leadership model by means of 12 focus groups, as well as one focus group consisting of
the school’s management team. The 12 focus groups comprised 85 learners from the entire Grade
7 group of 140 learners (61% participation). Seven individual interviews were conducted at the
middle of the year and five at the end of the year, just before the school closed.
Consent was obtained from the Department of Education, the school’s management team,
the parents of the learners and the learners themselves. Learners were assured that information
would be treated confidentially at all times and any learner who wanted to withdraw from the
research process at any stage, could do so.
Trustworthiness
The trustworthiness of this study was ensured by the following processes: literature triangulation,
detecting of detailed and complete electronic audit trace by means of Atlas.ti 5 work table; the
mechanisation of data (Neuman, 2000); providing complete descriptions by participants
(Creswell, 1997; Miles & Huberman, 1994); and constant comparison (Strauss & Corbin, 1998;
Silverman, 1993) of analysis of data collection, data analysis and conceptualisation (Parry, 1998).

8. Data analysis
The qualitative analysis was done by means of computer-aided analysis software. The Atlas.ti 5 is
essentially a code-and-retrieve programme (Conger, 1998). This allows the researcher to work
through the text, break it up into subcategories by attaching codes to each category, and then re-
organise the codes in groups. General features that are suggested by various authors (Berg, 1998;
Charmaz, 2002; Conger, 1998; Creswell, 1998; Neuman, 2000; Strauss & Corbin, 1998) were
used as a guideline for the content analysis of the data.
Data analysis in qualitative research entails searching for patterns or themes in the data (Neuman,
2000; Seale, 2002). The course of the data analysis process can briefly be described as set out
below.
Step 1 - The data is fragmented through a process of open coding and divided into as many
meaningful subcategories as possible.
Step 2 - During the process of axial coding, the broad categories, which were created during open
coding, are grouped according to themes to illustrate a central idea.
Step 3 - During selective coding the categories are integrated, refined and illustrated with
quotations.
RESULTS
The discussion of all the data is supported by relevant quotes from the all participants.
DISCUSSION
In the discussion of the age appropriateness of leadership models in the preadolescent life phase,
the model of Ryff and Keyes (1995) is conceptualised by the creation of a context (environmental
mastery) that informs personal growth, purpose in life, autonomy, self-acceptance and positive
relations with others. The reciprocal interaction between the individual and the environment co-
creates environmental mastery, or the lack thereof, which again contributes or limits the other
dimensions. It is proposed that all the other dimensions are embedded in the context of the
environment.
An environment in which preadolescents have a sense of mastery and competence in

9. managing themselves, their relationships and the contexts is characterised by an accessible,
interactive, negotiated space. In this space they should have opportunities to exercise control
over their environment, and learn to draw on available resources (human relationships as well as
physical resources in the environment) to make optimal use of opportunities and to develop their
cognitive, emotional, social and moral potential. This type of environment should be accessible to
the preadolescent so that learning opportunities can facilitate growth in learners, thereby enabling
them to choose contexts suitable to their developing needs and values (Follet, 1985).
The preadolescent leaders and non-leaders in this study perceived both the traditional and
the new leadership models as very limiting in that there was a lack of control to change or
improve their interpersonal and contextual environments. Due to the specific developmental
phase of preadolescent children, they are still in a learning process and need to be given
opportunities to learn different skills, such as competence in mastering interpersonal skills. They
also need to develop their intrapsychic abilities and to explore different contexts (Sternberg,
2004). In both leadership models the development of these tasks were distorted and limited.
The context is limited by the underlying assumptions on which these leadership models
are based, developed and implemented such as competition, achievement, status and rewards
(Follet, 1985). These assumptions co-create a context in which unfairness flourishes. Such a
context is characterised by competition and comparison, exclusion and deprivation of the natural
environment in which preadolescent children naturally experiment with leadership roles, as
illustrated by the following quotes:
All of the children have leadership potential…. Yes, [but] not everyone has the potential like high
profile leaders. I suppose not everyone can become the prime minister.
It is simply not possible for everyone to be the winner.
Children will also be excluded later on in life. (Member of the Management team)
The obvious criteria for preadolescent leaders include that they should be willing and
have the ability to perform the required duties, be an example to others and be hard-working. The
reality, however, is that the democratic selection process is based on popularity that is achieved
by sport achievements, intellectual abilities and physical appearance. This finding is also
supported by Buscall (1994) and Newman and Newman (1997).
If you are not popular, you will not become a chairman. Your academic performance does
not matter and it does not matter whether or not the teachers like you. If you are popular,

10. you will be selected as a leader.
Being an example to others, performance, hard work and having intellectual ability will
help you to be selected.
An unnatural environment of a forced division is created whereby children’s natural social
processes are disrupted by a superficial allocation of roles and responsibilities based on an
adultist model of leadership. The best defence mechanism for the preadolescent against the
inclusion in, and the exclusion form, the group due to the appointment of leaders is the positive
relationships with friends. With the appointment of leaders a small select subgroup is formed and
the group norms and social values of the spontaneous friendship groups are transformed by a new
set of norms that are fostered by individual attention, training camps and special meetings.
Previous existing group formations are split by the process. One participant expressed it as
follows:
I am unhappy because sometimes the prefects form a group and spend time on their own.
Unfortunately all of my friends became prefects. As a result I feel on my own without any friends.
For instance, when I wanted to visit N**s on Friday, they had a prefect meeting. The next Friday
he had to get ready for a party. The next morning I heard that all of the prefects had learned to
dance – with girls! – completely like a group of insane matric boys.
The power of friendships is extremely significant for the developing preadolescent (Kail
& Cavanaugh, 2000; Newman & Newman, 1997; Sigelman, 1999; Thompson, Grace & Cohen,
2001; Sullivan, 1969). This context that has been created by the leadership models does not allow
for any natural way of dealing with interpersonal loss and personal validation (Adler & Adler,
1998; Kail & Cavanaugh, 2000). Friendships have to be specially nurtured in preadolescents
because preadolescence represents a so-called sensitive period or “teachable moment” in the
development of the child (Havinghurst in Newman & Newman, 1997).
The preadolescent life phase is the time during which children are most ready to acquire
new skills (Newman & Newman, 1997; Sigelman, 1999). Skills related to personal growth are
reflected in the preadolescents’ evaluation of the leadership models. Children described what
they felt to be a limiting environment because they felt bored by the reality of the demands of
leadership tasks. In time they became uninterested in pursuing the leadership responsibilities
since these responsibilities invaded their school life, free time and friendships.
The way I see it, leaders are a waste of time. If you are selected as a leader, your responsibility

11. would for instance be to stand at the toilets and tell children that they are not allowed to go in
after break. How on earth could this develop your leadership qualities?
After a while it did not bother me any more because leaders have many responsibilities and their
duties are certainly not pleasant.
In addition, the developing preadolescent do not have the abilities to apply the power
associated with their leadership positions responsibly:
Because they pick on and make fun of the children they do not like.
They tell the children exactly what to do, e.g. ‘I need to stand in front of you, because I am
a leader’, ‘Carry my school-bag’etc.
Sometimes they are rude and they pull and tug and push and shove as they wish.
They are so arrogant, it ‘sucks’. I lost two friends because they are leaders and they regard
themselves as superior.
A positive feature is that children experience personal growth in the assignment of the
leadership title since it contributes to their self-confidence, perceived status and
acknowledgement by the community, parents and teachers.
I learned how to work as a team; to trust others; not to allow others to walk all over me; what it
meant to be obedient and patient with less important duties such as watching the toilets; to be
independent and stand on my own feet; to take decisions; to have perseverance; to be
responsible.
Teachers, school children, parents and the community regard leaders as children with high
status. Being a leader is quite an achievement. You feel and are important when you are a leader.
Leaders are more important than those who are not leaders.
However, very little involvement of teachers in the facilitation of constructive learning
opportunities has been observed. Fixed roles are applied by the teachers to the children, without
any negotiation with the children. Teachers are perceived as absent and it was felt that the
teachers in fact contribute to the unfair practices.
At some of the meetings, in fact most of them, the teachers are not even present. Then you
can not control the children at all. You stand in front and no one listens to you, you just
waste your time.
No, and then we don’t do it properly and they scold us because we did it wrong. But the
teachers never told us how it is supposed to be done.

12. In the preadolescent life phase children should be guided. Processes should be facilitated
to nurture their development to allow for the development of personal skills. Participants
perceived that leadership positions contributed to their purpose in life. For instance, a person
who is not a leader in the primary school, will have less chance to be a leader in high school.
They also perceive that leadership will help a person to obtain a job in future. One of the
participants verbalised it as follows:
Then it creates a good impression with the children when they go to high school, because
perhaps later in life again they will have the opportunity to become a leader. It might
perhaps help you to get a job and you/she could even one day become the boss.
The whole process of leadership assignment (to be or not to be a leader) is interpreted by
preadolescents in relation to their identity. This illustrates the sensitivity of this developmental
phase. Preadolescents do not have the cognitive ability to understand that the assigned identity is
only one interpretation of the power relationship between the school and the child, or to
distinguish between the assigned role and the self (Mottier, 2000; Burr, 1995). These
intrapsychic and interpersonal processes contribute to early leadership and personal identity
foreclosure, with little space for the development of exploration and commitment (Schwartz &
Dunham, 2000; Sternberg, 2004).
When you are a leader, it means that you have to be a role model for other children. This gives
others somebody to look up to. Leaders are selected by the children; they know who can take the
lead and accept it. Leaders are superior to other children and those who are not leaders can look
up to the leaders.
The preadolescent who has not been selected as a leader has more opportunities to
develop autonomy, since the rigid procedures as well as the narrowly defined tasks and
responsibilities of the leadership role do not have the power to limit the child’s developing self.
Emotions that typically arise from the impaired level of self-acceptance were expressed by both
leaders and non-leaders, indicating impaired levels of self-acceptance.
But [I] am sad about the fact that…if you do not perform well in something, you are nothing.
It took me a lot of courage to say what I am about to tell you. When I was selected as a leader I
was delighted, but when I saw the other children crying I felt really bad and thought that it was
unreasonable and unfair.
Very few participants dissociated themselves from the process in a manner that would

13. indicate their ability to resist social pressures and to regulate themselves according to their
personal standards (Ruini & Fava, 2004).
Now I don’t understand why the children selected the leaders, because when it comes to
recognising leadership qualities, they do not have a clue. They merely selected the children they
liked the most. I really do not care, because I enjoy my life the way it is.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Both of the leadership models did not contribute to the well-being of preadolescent development.
The following recommendations are made to promote the well-being of preadolescents. The
Department of Education should take responsibility for the co-creation of enabling school
environments by facilitating learning opportunities, such as workshops that include both teachers
and children to share alternative approaches that would assist them to optimise this critical
learning phase of preadolescent development. Management of schools should use the existing
opportunities in which preadolescents can participate and involve all the children in activities that
will facilitate the development of their cognitive, emotional, social and moral potential. For
example when children are expected to assist with the organisation of social, cultural or sports
events, children can take turns to assist with the planning and executing of various tasks. It is
however of critical importance that adults guide the children for example to identify available
resources; to model appropriate behaviour in terms of utilising the resources; to determine what
specific tasks need to be attended to; to determine priorities and to ensure that all the
responsibilities have been met. By applying an inclusive approach everybody gets an opportunity
to exercise skills and by allowing children to take control of certain aspects of their lives, guided
by adult-facilitators, the natural social processes of preadolescent development would be
optimally supported. This approach would also endorse principles of inclusion and fairness that
contribute to the well-being of school communities in general.
CONCLUSION
The study indicated that preadolescent leadership does not promote well-being on an individual,
interpersonal and contextual level. On the contrary, it contributes to negative evaluations of the
self, disrupted peer group interactions; distorted relationships with adults; and limited
environments for self development. From a well-being perspective the educational system should

14. be revised to create more opportunities for developing creativity, empathy, optimism and hope.
REFERENCES
Adler PA & Adler P 1998. Peer power: preadolescent culture and identity. London: Rutgers
University Press.
American Bar Association. (2003). Adolescent brain development and legal culpability.
http:/www.abanet.org. Accessed 3 March.
Barker RA 1997. How can we train leaders if we do not know what leadership is? Human
Relations, 50: 343-362.
Bell JH & Bromnick RD 2003. The social reality of the imaginary audience: A grounded theory
approach. Adolescence, 38: 205-219.
Berg BL 1998. Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. London: Allyn & Bacon.
Berger KS 1994. The developing person through the life span. (3rd
Ed.). New York: Worth
Publishers.
Berman S 1997. Children’s social consciousness and the development of social responsibility.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Bowie N 2000. A Kantian theory of leadership. The Leadership and Organization Development
Journal, 21: 185-193.
Buscall D, Duerin K, Macallister H & Robson M 1994. Student leadership: where is it at in our
schools? The Practicing Administrator, 4: 30-34.
Burr V 1995. An introduction to social constructionism. London: Routledge.
Charmaz, K. (2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In: Gubrium JF &
Holstein JA (eds). Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method. London: Sage.
Conger JA 1998. Qualitative Research as the Cornerstone Methodology for Understanding
Leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 9: 107-121.
Creswell JW 1998. Qualitative enquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.
London: Sage.
De Wilzem E 1988. Die identifisering en ontwikkeling van leierskap by primêre skool-leerlinge.
Ongepubliseerde M.Ed. verhandeling. Johannesburg: RAU.
De Beer, G.D.J. (1992). Riglyne vir die verkiesing van leerlingrade in die sekondêre skool.
Ongepubliseerde MEd verhandeling. Potchefstroom: PU vir CHO.

15. De Wilzem E 1988. Die identifisering en ontwikkeling van leierskap by primêre-skool leerlinge.
Ongepubliseerde MEd verhandeling. Johannesburg: RAU.
Du Plessis WJ 1994. ‘n Vergelyking van die ontstaan, doelstellings en funksies van leerlingrade
en “die students’ representative councils” met die oog op ‘n sinvolle leerlingleier praktyk vir die
toekoms. Ongepubliseerde MEd verhandeling. Stellenbosch: Universiteit van Stellenbosch.
Erikson EH 1980. Identity and life cycle. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Follet BH 1985. Leadership: a concept prison. Educational Journal, 95: 30-32.
Gibbons PT 1992. Impacts of organization evolution on leadership roles and behaviors. Human
Relations, 45: 1-17.
Gied J, Blumenthal J, Jeffries N, Castellanos F, Lui H, Zijdenbos A, Paus T, Evans A & Rapoport
J 1999. Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal MRI study. Nature
Neuroscience, 2: 861-863.
Hendrikz J 1983. Leieridentifisering by veldskole. Ongepubliseerde MEd. verhandeling. Pretoria:
Universiteit van Pretoria.
Hook D, Watts J & Cockcroft K 2002. Developmental psychology. Lansdowne: UCT Press.
Kail RV & Cavanaugh JC 2000. Human Development – A Lifespan View. Belmont:
Wadsworth.
Kaplan PS 1998. The human odyssey: Life - span development.( 3rd
Ed). Pacific Grove:
Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Miles MB & Huberman AM 1994. Qualitative data analyses. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Minden K 2004. New Science, New Strategies: Helping Canadian Teens Transition to
Adulthood. www.mindenschipper.com. Accessed 7 September 2004.
Mottier V 2000. Narratives of national identity: sexuality, race, and the Swiss dream of order.
Swiss Journal of Sociology, 26: 533-558.
Newman PR & Newman BM 1997. Childhood and Adolescence. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole
Publishing Company.
Neuman WL 2000. Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. (4th
Ed.).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Parry KW 1998. Grounded Theory and Social Process: A New Direction for Leadership
Research. Leadership Quarterly, 9: 85-105.
Peterson C 1996. Looking forward through the lifespan. Developmental psychology. (3rd
Ed.).

16. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Rost JC 1991. Leadership for the twenty first century. New York: Preager.
Rost JC 1993. Leadership development in the new millennium. The Journal of Leadership
Studies, 1: 92-110.
Ruini C & Fava GA 2004. Clinical applications of well-being therapy. In P.A. Linley & S.
Joseph. Positive Psychology in Practice. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Son, Inc.
Ryff CD & Keyes CLM 1995. The structure of psychological well-being revisited. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 69: 719 - 727.
Schwartz SJ & Dunham RM 2000. Identity status formulae: generating continuous measures of
exploration and commitment. Adolescence 35: 183-198.
Seale CF 2002. Computer-assisted analysis of qualitative interview data. In: Gubrium JF &
Holstein JA (Eds). Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method. London: Sage.
Sigelman CK 1999. Life-Span human development. (3rd
Ed.). Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole
Publishing Company.
Shaffer DR 2000. Social and personality development. (4th
Ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.
Silverman D 1993. Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analysing talk, text and interaction.
London: Sage.
Strauss A & Corbin J 1998. Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Smith JAJ 1991. Medebetrokkenheid en medeseggenskap van jeugleiers - ‘n bestuursimperatief.
In: Basson CJJ & Smith JAJ. Onderwysbestuur. Waterkloof: Unibook.
Stafford E 1982. The unique middle school student: an unknown ingredient. The Physical
Educator, 39: 38-42.
Sternberg RJ 2004. Psychology. (4th
Ed). Belmont: Wadsworth.
Strydom AH 1970. Die taak van die skool as samelewingsverband met betrekking tot die
voorbereiding en toerusting van die jeugdige leier vir sy taak in ‘n gedifferensieerde samelewing.
Ongepubliseerde DEd proefskrif. Stellenbosch: Universiteit van Stellenbosch.
Sullivan HS 1969. The interpersonal theory of psychiatry. New York: W.W Norton & Company
Inc.
Thompson M, Grace C & Cohen L 2001. Best friends, worst enemies: children’s friendships,
popularity and social cruelty. London: Penguin Books.
Tierney WC 1996. Leadership and postmodernism: on voice and the qualitative method.

17. Leadership Quarterly, 7: 371-383.
Walker DM 1995. Growth and development during the middle school years. In: Wavering MJ
(Ed.) Educating young adolescents - life in the middle. New York: Garland Publishing.
Wavering MJ (Ed). 1995. Educating young adolscents – life in the middle. New York: Garland
Publishing.
Weber OJ 1985. Enkele leierskapessensies in die opvoeding van jeugleiers met spesiale
verwysing na die Hedendaagse Skool. Ongepubliseerde DEdverhandeling Pretoria: Unisa.
Wiles J & Bondi J 2001. The new American middle school: educating preadolescents in an era of
change. (3rd
Ed.). New Jersey: Prentice–Hall, Inc.
Yamaguchi R 2001. Children’s learning groups: A study of emergent leadership, dominance, and
group effectiveness. Small Group Research, 32: 671-697.